Bob, the
ONLY numbers that the DB Admins care about are the numbers that are in the database. The numbers in the database show that the 747-400
CANNOT operate a 23-hour segment under any circumstance.
BTW, your "add 1500nm flying east" is a misleading statement. Does it include the required overwater reserves for an eastbound flight? Does it include a departure with a plane loaded to MZFW and then fueled to MTOW or is it under MTOW?
The important numbers for the 747-400 are such (from the Database) -
Dry Operating Weight 178756 kg
Max Zero Fuel Weight 246074 kg
Max Take Off Weight 396893 kg
Cargo Capacity 34759 kg
Again from the flight log -
410 passengers (at 100kg/pax) - 41000kg
410 Pax Baggage (at 25kg/pax) - 10250kg
Cargo - 249509kg
That gives a payload weight of - 300759kg
Plus the aircraft Weight gives you 479515kg or 82622kg over the MTOW of the aircraft.
Okay, so we give that FlyNET doesn't take ZFW into account when loading the aircraft and reduce the load to MZFW (or 67318kg of payload). This means that with the 747-400, your maximum fuel at ZFW is 150819kg. He burned 141314kg for his flight of 22 hours, leaving him with (at most) 9505kg of fuel in the tanks. That means that he had to have been burning 6418kg/hr of fuel. The nominal burn for a 747-400 at
LONG RANGE CRUISE after a MTOW departure is ~11700kg/hr. I'm ignoring the required reserves because I understand that not everyone is going to take the time to figure those out, but 9500kg of fuel is not enough if you had figured them out.
It has been stated in the past on this forum that it is the responsibility of the airlines to ensure that their routes conform to the specs of the aircraft and that anything in excess will be viewed as cheating. It has also been acknowledged that the default aircraft are not even remotely accurate in many aspects and we have left it up to good judgement not take measures to ensure that people keep things reasonable. 22 hours in a 747-400 isn't reasonable.
One last thing - EGYP has a 2590m runway. At MTOW, the 747-400 requires a 3300m runway for departure. I want to know how the flight got airborne with that much weight on a runway that was over 700 meters too short. Not only that, but Mt. Pleasant's runway can only support about 225,000kg, so a 747 would be grossly overstressing the runway in real life as well.
Again, I'll stress the point - your operations are grossly unrealistic. If you want to do that, then maybe you should consider doing so outside of FlyNET. As it says on the "Info & Rules" page, the primary purpose of FlyNET is to -
Create and manage a virtual airline in a realistic ( more or less
) economy environment
